The
concept of zoos has very much evolved with time – in the past, zoos were places
for the royal family to house animals, where animals were used for human
entertainment. Under Nero, a Roman Emperor, four hundred tigers fought with
bulls and elephants while humans watched for their pleasure, and at the
Colosseum of Rome, five thousand animals perished in a single day after being forced
to fight each other. Today, the purpose of zoos and the way they operate is vastly
different – in some zoos, the keepers are even required have a master’s degree.
Despite these changes, it is indisputable that zoos today cannot sufficiently
provide for animals. Going forward, although conditions will indeed improve for
these animals, many will still suffer if they are housed in zoos.

Optimists would argue that animals enjoy better
quality zoos because of the stricter requirements imposed for zoo employees.
Some zoos even hire specific nutritionists and stud-book managers to cater to each
of the animals’ specific needs. Despite this claim, even if the zoos of today
have the ability to understand the needs of the animal, they are largely unable
to provide for it. Animals have each of their own specific needs, from the
basics of keeping instincts sharp by escaping from animals and finding prey, to
more complicated needs, such as the way they locate mates for mating. Zoos
often cannot provide for it, because each animal can only meet these needs in
their own habitats, something that zoos cannot replicate. With the obvious lack
of space in zoos – animals are inevitably deprived of sufficient space to meet
its needs when placed in a zoo. For instance, the space an elephant is supposed
to have is almost twenty times larger than what it is actually given, which
means that it lacks sufficient space to exercise, which is necessary for it to
keep healthy. From this alone, we can tell that the physical incapability of
zoos show that zoos can never be sufficient at replicating the ideal habitat
for animals. This problem is exacerbated by the fact that the zoos of today are
meant to showcase a whole range of animals that live in different conditions,
from aquatic animals like seals to the king of the forest, the lion – zoos have
to spread its already limited resources thin for all the animals its houses. Furthermore, in spite of this problem, little
is being done to improve the conditions the animals are in. On the contrary, it
gives the veneer that the animals are comfortable and happy with their
condition, generating little interest or will to continue improving their
habitats. This is despite the fact that behavioural studies show the exact
opposite. The better alternative would
be to place more resources into preserving the current natural habitats of the
animals, for example the grassy savanna terrain. Preservation goes a longer
way because it is something that is more permanent, and is not subject to
various factors such as the lack of visitors, which can cause a zoo to close
down completely.

Advocates of zoos assert that zoos are
essential to repopulate animals into their natural habitats by breeding them in
man-made enclosures that provide them with daily necessities and protection
from natural predators. This allows animals to grow in numbers, and from there,
communities of animals can be reintroduced into the wild. Despite this claim,
the truth is that in the long run, keeping animals in zoos harms the animals
more than it helps them. It may be true that zoos keep animals safe from
predators, and provide meals which animals otherwise would not have gotten, but
this may not be the best thing for the animals. In the long run, animals become
habituated to an environment of comfort, because they are neither filled with
fear of predators, nor with the pangs of hunger that push them to continue
searching for prey. Content with their safety, the animals lose the sharpness
in their instincts. When released back into the wild, these animals cannot cope
with the harsh needs that their environments demand. This was etched in the attempt
to repopulate orang-utans into the forests of Sumatra – the mammals died off
because they could no longer climb trees efficaciously, after being closed in
their small, insufficient enclosures. Even in the instance where efforts to
repopulate animals work, the benefit of doing so is often misplaced. The key,
primary purpose of zoos today is not to help the animals as much as possible,
but rather to earn as much profit as possible. This is because the money gained
from visitors is necessary for the zoo to pay for rent, food, maintenance
costs, and also the salaries of the workers. This means that it is in the best
interest of zoos to implement the course of action that earns itself the most
profit, even in the instance where it is not in the best interest of animals in
the zoo. Thus, zoos are more inclined to breeding animals that are more popular
amongst visitors, although it may not be the animal that is in the most dire
straits of becoming extinct. The safety bubble provided by zoos eventually
harms the animals when they are repopulated – on top of that the nature of zoos
being profit-motivated hinders its ability to protect and conserve the animals that
needs the help the most.

In addition, the zoo’s supporters propound
that animals can be a source of entertainment and education for its visitors. Youngsters
who are interested in animals would visit the zoo, and from there, exhibits
will be able to educate the public on the different types of animals in the
zoo. This aims to raise awareness about the plight of endangered animals, such
as the giant panda. However, on a first, level, using animals for our own
enjoyment is inherently unjustified. Just because human civilisation is more
powerful and has greater capabilities, does not mean that they should be
allowed to enslave animals and put them on display. On the contrary, it means
that humans should have a greater responsibility to take care of the natural
habitats that these animals belong to – as declared in the Spiderman series,
“with great power, comes great responsibility”. Just as how humans are given
their right to movement and the right to bodily autonomy, animals should be no
less deserving of these rights. Humans, after all, are just scientific
extensions of other animals. Hence, it is not justified for people to limit the
rights of animals just to use them as a means to our own entertainment and
enjoyment. Furthermore, aiming to use the zoo as a means to educate the
population about animals is largely ineffective. Young children that go to the
zoo are not interested in finding out more about the history and numbers of
these animals, but contrary to this, look out for exciting shows that animals
trained to perform. This means that zoos tend to appeal to the emotional needs
of the children, as Andy Baker, senior vice president for animal programs at
Philadelphia Zoo, admitted. Not only are zoos disinterested in disseminating
information about animals, children themselves are more likely to be interested
by that ball trick performed by the seal in the tank as compared to the dry,
boring signage describing its geological descent and its plummeting numbers in
the sea. Evidently, keeping animals in their small enclosures is not only
unjustified, it does not achieve its supposed end of educating the population
about the dire situation faced by animals.

The road to hell is paved with good
intentions – granted, the intentions of zoos today may be well and good, however
it is incapable of providing the needs of the animals that consist it. Zoos
today cannot provide the space, nor the environmental condition that most
animals are used to, and even if they could, the over-comfort provided by zoos
cause animals to lose their instincts in the long term, and they will be unable
to adapt back to the harsh environment when repopulated. Rather than trying to
protect them in zoos, it would be much more effective to protect the animals by
preserving their natural habitats and prevent the poaching of these animals,
which are a key reason for their condition